However...A Big Part of the issue was Ukraine wanted to join the EU and NATO, however the Ukrainian president at the time decided to side with Russia while most of the country wanted to be with the EU.

Actually, the handover of USSR's stockpile of nuclear weapons in the Ukraine wasn't in exchange for defense, but rather in exchange for a promise from Russia that Russia will never use its military weapons to attack or intimidate the Ukraine. (See the Budapest Memorandum, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B... [wikipedia.org] )

Clearly, that agreement has been broken by Russia. Of course, I doubt any powers are going to try to exacerbate the situation by either providing the Ukraine with nuclear weapons or suggesting that Ukraine should acquire nuclear weapons, but based on my understanding of the Budapest Memorandum, Ukraine is well within its rights to do so now that Russia has breached the agreement.

The BBC and many other outlets have published NATO confirmations that at least 1000 Russian soldiers have entered Ukraine in this invasion. This directly contradicts your ludicrous claim, but you already knew that.

Ukraine disarmed itself in 2006 at our urging, with the understanding that we would come to their aid if ever it were needed.

The only "aid" that the US is obligated to provide Ukraine under the Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances [wikisource.org] is to seek UN Security Council action in the event that Ukraine is attacked (or threatened) with nuclear weapons.

The agreement is a one page document written in plain language. It's hard to imagine anyone who's read it would interpret it as you do.

Russia and China just signed a big longterm gas and oil deal. Any amounts over that, in a scenario where Russia doesn't have other buyers, and China would be able to push the price down as far as they wanted; barely over cost.

Also, China is 9th in the world in natural gas production, and they don't use much; only 5% of their energy usage in 2012.

And they've been working hard to diversify their energy supply. They're not going to stop buying from the countries they just signed trade agreements with. Those are real victories much bigger than a short-term discount. They're also not going to convert factories to a new fuel source just to be supplied by Russia, because Russia is not an honest player; everybody knows, especially the Chinese, that they will raise your prices if you don't act like their puppet. China doesn't like being told what to do. At. All.

1954 Crimea was given as a "Gift" to Ukraine by Russia/USSR and Nikita Khrushchev (an ethnic Ukrainian) as a symbolic gesture commemorating the 300th anniversary of Crimea becoming part of the Russian empire.1991 Ukraine voted overwhelmingly for independence from Russia1994 Ukraine signed a treaty with Russia and the USA to disarm its nuclear arsenal in return for a treaty that guaranteed Russia and USA would come to their aid if they were ever invaded.2010 Viktor Fedorovych Yanukovych was elected president. He had been a minister of an eastern Ukrainian province. The US and Europe had supported his opponent, and Russia had supported him. Likely both sides illegally influenced the election with money and espionage. In the following years, there is little doubt he ran the country in the ground, he was a terrible president.2014 The Ukrainian parliament voted overwhelmingly to remove him from the presidential office. A poll in April showed his approval rating at 5% This event was likely assisted by the US and Europe and was basically a Coup de'etat. Russia freaked out and had Russian agents already in place in Ukraine start stiring up violent unrest. They've basically been in a state of civil war since. Russia is providing troops and hardware, the west seem a little more reluctant to provide direct support.

Russias primary goals are to keep the strategic port in the black sea open and prevent Ukraine from joining the EU.

Wow that is some pretty powerful Russian propaganda you have been drinking there. Calling normal peaceful Ukranians "fascists"? Check. Calling it a "violent overthrow" despite it not being one? Check. Calling the government "ultra nationalist"? Check. Blaming the US despite them having nothing to do with anything? Check. Russians have a "right to use force"? Check.

So USA isn't a bully? You do realize US started the whole deal in Ukraine right?

I'm asking you this as a US citizen for 15 years, who has lived in US for 20 years, served in US army for 7.5 years, will almost certainly live out the rest of my life here (as in very much invested in US and its future), but I was born and grew up until 13 in Ukraine. Thing is I damn well want the best for United States and Ukraine. At the same time I realize very well who started this conflict, and know that Ukraine will be much better off with Russia. Putin is doing everything 100% right (this article about invasion is total BS by the way). He is staying out of direct conflict, while supporting the rebels. US has done this countless times, difference is there is an overwhelming support for Putin in Ukraine (most Ukrainians are literally Russians in every way that matters), so he will succeed. Country will split in half, more likely majority of it will be Russian. The rest will join EU and will unfortunately suffer as EU is in a really bad position themselves and can't afford to help.

You don't hear these things because US/EU/Kiev controlled press suppresses a lot of information, and Kiev government is suppressing the people (election were completely bogus). People that voice disagreement against Ukrainian government are thrown in jail, beaten, sometimes burned alive, forced to go to front lines to die without support. Maidan 3.0 is beginning.

I have a lot of relatives and friends in Ukraine. I read news from all sides. I understand the bond between Russians and Ukrainians, there simply is nothing like that in America. It's a hell of a lot closer than US and Britan/Canada/Australia, but you don't have any idea what that's like. You also don't know what it's like to have your countrymen carrying portraits and flags of someone who greeted Nazi's as friends. Might want to look up Lviv Pogrom 1941 where the people you support killed 4,000 jews in one day to celebrate Hitler. They did way more than that later. I also know very well how Americans view anything outside of their own city/state, I served with them, I was one of them in Iraq for 3 combat tours 1 year each.

Removing elected officials from office because of their corruption is not contrary to the rule of law. And Yanukovich was a corrupt Russian puppet. Eastern Ukraine was not cut off from the vote. That's a lie. Not that it would matter. The winner of the election got 53%. The next highest runner up (and there were a few) got less than 20%. This election was about as clear-cut as they ever get.

The current Ukrainian government was not elected in a nationwide vote, and one of their first acts was to ban the use of Russian (the first language of half the population) as an official language.

Neither of those are true. The current Ukrainian government was elected in a nation wide vote (minus Crimea and potentially the rebelling areas). The current President replaced the interim one. The banning of Russian never happened. It was PROPOSED, and it never was passed. I don't think it even was put to a vote.

The only reason those populations were intentionally alienated is because their main source of news is Russian news, which has been feeding them the propaganda you're referencing.

It is understandable that they want either autonomy or secession, and I don't see why that is wrong.

The reason it is wrong is because those people are part of a country. The WHOLE country decides if a part should be separated from them. Further the Ukrainian constitution mandates that such referendums must be done nationally. So per the Ukrainian constitution it's unconstitutional.

Regardless of how you feel about the protests, there were free, fair, credible, and widely recognized elections after those events. Fail.

The current government of Ukraine is 100% legit by any standard. Russia engages in misdirection, which you follow quite a ways here, but they don't have any actual complaint about the most recent elections, nor have they brought any complaints to the UN Security Council.

And on the flipside, my neighbor is Ukrainian. Ukrainian Independence Day was this past weekend, and they invited me over for a few drinks. (Which, as a side, do not drink with Ukrainians on Ukrainian Independence Day if you like a functional liver). None of them speak English terribly well, but they made it abundantly clear it's bad over there right now. They've still got family & friends there, and they're naturally worried.

Several shots later, they taught me the phrases, "Fuck Putin" and "Fuck Russia" in Ukrainian. Fans of Russia, they are not.

It would actually be easier than Georgia, I suspect. The big problem that Ukraine has is that, like most other ex-Soviet states, it let its military deteriorate in the 90s to the point of utter inefficiency (did you see the photos a govt guy just posted of what their BTR reserves look like, in response to a Facebook question as to why volunteers aren't getting vehicles?), but unlike them, it didn't get a wake-up call until now, like Russia itself got in Chechnya, or Georgia got in Ossetia and Abkhazia. So now they have to recover and learn very quickly. There's a lot of enthusiasm on the troop level, but logistics is in shambles, their officers seem to have a poor grasp of tactics (like e.g. ordering an artillery unit to stay in one place while firing... needless to say, they get fucked by counter-battery fire, and the reason why we know about this story is because there were survivors), and their generals don't understand that grand plans they make bear little in common with reality. This, again, is a lot like Russia was during the first conflict in Chechnya, but that was an easier opponent, and consequences of defeat were not as far reaching.

What's going for Ukraine is that their population reserves are bigger, and they retained a larger arsenal as part of the Soviet legacy. Also, the fact that a significant part of Soviet military industry was in Ukraine, so they have experience manufacturing the things they need.

Either way, I think that the only reason why they can still fight effectively, even with large casualties, is because Russian involvement is still undercover. It became noticeably less so over the last week, what with armored columns openly crossing the border (but still with removed flags) etc, and notice how the situation that was so dire for the rebels suddenly became so dire for the Ukrainian troops. If Russia were to go all in, openly, throwing all units that it already converged at the border, I don't think Ukraine stands a chance without outside help.

How long can Russia occupy Ukraine, now, is a different question. That area has a long history of guerrilla warfare against occupiers of all kinds, including Soviets back in WW2 days. And there's a strong resolve to resist among the populace today. An occupying force might win in the field, but find itself facing bullets from every window in the cities at night.